A.K. RAJASEKARAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, NAGAPATTINAM, COLLECTORATE
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
District Collector, Nagapattinam, Collectorate
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) The five writ petitions are filed for certiorarified mandamus challenging the communication of the first respondent dated 04/01/2019. The facts are identical and the grounds in support of the prayer is also identical. Hence, after considering the averments in the affidavits, counter affidavits and reply affidavit, the following common order is passed.
(2.) In the affidavit filed by A.K. Rajasekaran, petitioner in W.P. No. 3458 of 2019, it is stated that, based on G.O. Ms. No. 50 Industries (MMC-1) dated 27/04/2017, the 3rd respondent vide his order dated 14/08/2018 permitted him to quarry clay, silt, savudu and gravel at free of charges from the Government pond in Radhanallur village subject to conditions. Accordingly, he spent money and quarried clay, silt, savudu and gravel from the said pond for improving the soil of his agricultural land. Since, it was harvest season and also rainy, he stored the 65 units of silt/savudu quarried from the pond in the vacant land of one Agoram to use it in his agricultural land later, after harvest is over.
(3.) Similarly, for the same reason, other permit holders also stored the mineral in the vacant land of Agoram. Noticing huge storage of silt/savudu in the land of Agoram, the Police attached to Thiruvengadu Police Station viewed it as illegal storage of river sand and formally seized 1800 units of sand on registering criminal case under sections 379, 420 IPC and Section 3(1) of the Tamil Nadu Property Prevention of Damage and Loss Act, (TNPPDL Act) and Section 21 (1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulations) Act 1957.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.